1915 Recessed ear

[absence of uniformity]

Can I ask a question please ;

The follwing coin is not a recessed correct? There is no broken tooth.

Does the ear look recessed to you?

 

 

 

 

 

[terrysoldpennies]

No sorry its not a Recessed Ear type .  With slightly worn coins, the recessed ear type shows no sign of ware to the top of the ear [ the Slight flattening you see on your example shows that the centre is protruding and readily becomes warn

Also usually the tooth above left of the colon between T:O is damaged but not always with the 1915 , but always on the 1916.

[absence of uniformity]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

No sorry its not a Recessed Ear type .  With slightly worn coins, the recessed ear type shows no sign of ware to the top of the ear [ the Slight flattening you see on your example shows that the centre is protruding and readily becomes warn

Also usually the tooth above left of the colon between T:O is damaged but not always with the 1915 , but always on the 1916.

Excellent, thank you very much really helpful information.

[absence of uniformity]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

No sorry its not a Recessed Ear type .  With slightly worn coins, the recessed ear type shows no sign of ware to the top of the ear [ the Slight flattening you see on your example shows that the centre is protruding and readily becomes warn

Also usually the tooth above left of the colon between T:O is damaged but not always with the 1915 , but always on the 1916.

One other question I have please ; I know higher grade examples are really hard to come by with the recessed ear. But on better grade 1915 penny that dont have the broken tooth and not much wear to use that as a guide what would be the process be to identify the recessed ear? thanks

[absence of uniformity]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

No sorry its not a Recessed Ear type .  With slightly worn coins, the recessed ear type shows no sign of ware to the top of the ear [ the Slight flattening you see on your example shows that the centre is protruding and readily becomes warn

Also usually the tooth above left of the colon between T:O is damaged but not always with the 1915 , but always on the 1916.

As example this coin is less worn, I cant see a broken tooth. how would you tell?

Thanks

[terrysoldpennies]

Well the answer to that is with difficulty .   Firstly the 1915 is rarer than the 1916 and that most collectors associate the type with the broken tooth and want it to be clearly visable .  And so without it, its really hard to tell from a photograph, but in hand its easier to determine the depression in the centre of the coin.     Below are four pictures of the tooth gradually looking more broken

Note in the top picture the tooth looks to be intact, but on closer inspection it is actually very slightly smaller . really hard to see on a coin. ?

[absence of uniformity]

41 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Well the answer to that is with difficulty .   Firstly the 1915 is rarer than the 1916 and that most collectors associate the type with the broken tooth and want it to be clearly visable .  And so without it, its really hard to tell from a photograph, but in hand its easier to determine the depression in the centre of the coin.     Below are four pictures of the tooth gradually looking more broken

Note in the top picture the tooth looks to be intact, but on closer inspection it is actually very slightly smaller . really hard to see on a coin. ?

I know the 1915 is hard to find with a good strike uncirculated but in the image I have attached it shows a " Lustrous uncirculated" coin and the the ear looks partially flat at the top. The darker coin I have circled all the wear which is mostly flat areas not shown on the uncirculated coin and yet the ear appears to be untouched. How can most of the face show flat spots but the ear the highest point appears less worn than the uncirculated coin. Or is it a question of a weak strike on the uncirculated coin. That doesnt account for the wear on the darker coin and ear looking to be mostly intact with no flat area. I'm going to guess this darker coin is a recessed ear.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by absence of uniformity

[absence of uniformity]

Also the uncirculated coins shows obvious ghosting where as the dark does not.

[Peckris 2]

48 minutes ago, absence of uniformity said:

I know the 1915 is hard to find with a good strike uncirculated but in the image I have attached it shows a " Lustrous uncirculated" coin and the the ear looks partially flat at the top. The darker coin I have circled all the wear which is mostly flat areas not shown on the uncirculated coin and yet the ear appears to be untouched. How can most of the face show flat spots but the ear the highest point appears less worn than the uncirculated coin. Or is it a question of a weak strike on the uncirculated coin. That doesnt account for the wear on the darker coin and ear looking to be mostly intact with no flat area. I'm going to guess this darker coin is a recessed ear.

 

In my opinion the darker coin IS a recessed ear, the lustrous coin is a typical worn die strike - very common during WW1 

[absence of uniformity]

9 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

In my opinion the darker coin IS a recessed ear, the lustrous coin is a typical worn die strike - very common during WW1 

Thanks !

[absence of uniformity]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Well the answer to that is with difficulty .   Firstly the 1915 is rarer than the 1916 and that most collectors associate the type with the broken tooth and want it to be clearly visable .  And so without it, its really hard to tell from a photograph, but in hand its easier to determine the depression in the centre of the coin.     Below are four pictures of the tooth gradually looking more broken

Note in the top picture the tooth looks to be intact, but on closer inspection it is actually very slightly smaller . really hard to see on a coin. ?

Thanks, I almost have one of each of the progression and one now without a broken tooth. Then I can forget about the recessed ear 😅 Well until better grade examples appear..

[absence of uniformity]

49 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

In my opinion the darker coin IS a recessed ear, the lustrous coin is a typical worn die strike - very common during WW1 

Although dark and some of the legends filled with crud the coin has good remaining details.